Well, i'm new to thephotoforum.com but yeah i've been coming here at least 3-4 times a week for the last year. Usually I just view the galleries heh. I have a Canon Digital Rebel xti with a kit-lens. I'm doing a wedding gig for a friend of mine and I know I need a different lense.

I'm very interested in doing some macro photography, and i'd like a little bit more zoom. I was thinking about getting these two lenses.

I don't need anything really freaking huge for a telephoto lens. 135mm will probably be fine for me.

Also was wondering if that Macro lens would be good for my friend's wedding? I know macro lenses are for close up and everything but is a Macro lens only for that or does it just offer that capability?

Macro lenses, when not taking pictures of stuff close up takes takes a soft focuses, almost blurry image. You definately want the 50-150mm lens. It will have all the length you need. This lens will be perfect for your friends wedding.

Of the two, the telephoto will be of more use in a wedding I think. Generally, you would see a good prime lens, a fast wide to moderate zoom like a 24-70, a fast 70-200mm telephoto, and maybe also a superwide 10-20mm at a wedding. Actually, you would see 2 of each of these, one for each of the bodies that you would be carrying along with 2 flashes.

I doubt you will be doing much macro photography at a wedding, but the 60mm would be usable for some of the candids.

A 'macro' lens can certainly be used as a regular lens. The 100mm Macro has been known to be a very sharp portrait lens as well.

For wedding photography, you will want something fast (large max aperture). The 50mm F1.8 is cheap, which makes it a popular choice.

The 28-135 IS, lens might be a good choice for you...but it's a bit slow for wedding photography.

To get into wedding photography...you will need high quality fast lenses. That is a big investment. If you are just shooting one wedding, you could rent a lens, or just make due with what you have. Do you have a flash (not the one in the camera)? A good flash will help you get by with lenses that are not so fast.

You can find the nifty fifty pretty much anywhere, for cheap. And even though it does have a very low price, it is a popular choice among many. Also look into some fast 70-200 lenses from various companies. (Canon is obviously the best but most expensive and probably heaviest choice).

Macro lenses, when not taking pictures of stuff close up takes takes a soft focuses, almost blurry image.

Click to expand...

Huh?!?!? That's news to me. Guess my EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro is defective since it takes freakin' sharp pictures at all ranges. Anyway, I agree with BigMike in that you will probably need to get a faster lens like the 50 f/1.8 or even f/1.4 for low-light situations. Renting the highly praised EF 24-70 f/2.8 L would be nice. 70-200 f/2.8 would be gravy. Don't know the extent of your experience or the results that your friend expects, but these lenses; or their equivalent, are staple in most pro shooters bags.

Macro lenses, when not taking pictures of stuff close up takes takes a soft focuses, almost blurry image. You definately want the 50-150mm lens. It will have all the length you need. This lens will be perfect for your friends wedding.

Click to expand...

As mike said... not all macros are the same. The Canon 100mm macro is one of the sharpest portrait lenses that you can buy.

Macro lenses, when not taking pictures of stuff close up takes takes a soft focuses, almost blurry image.

Click to expand...

Completely false.

Here is a shot taken inside a very dark building, shot at 800 ISO on a lowly Nikon D40, cropped a bunch, f/2.8 handheld at 1/30th of a second with a Nikon 105 f2.8 AF-S VR Macro. The bird stood 15 feet away.

Having said all the above, it doesn't look too fuzzy to me. I have literally thousands of images taken with the 105 Macro, which is just about the sharpest lens in my bag.

Here is another picture, taken at ISO 800 on the D40, f2.8 handheld at 1/30th of a second with a Nikon 105 f2.8 AF-S VR Macro. The bird stood 20 feet away... it doesn't look all that fuzzy to me either, considering this was shot handheld in extremely low light wide open with a shutter speed WAY lower than it should be... this lens is sharp as a tack. Just look how open the pupils of the eyes of the owl (and the eyes of the rail above) are... you when they are that wide open, you KNOW it is dim... a lens has to be pretty good to resolve well in this type of light.

One last one, outside this time, same D40, ISO 400, 1/60th of a second shutter speed, f/16.

The 50 f/1.4 and the EF-S 60 f/2.8 are great lenses. I am Canon bias having had poor experiences with off-brand lenses. Have not heard anything about the Tokina though. Have you looked at the Canon 70-200 f/4 L? Absolutley spectaculer lens. It's cheaper than the tokina option your looking at. There is also the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 if you need the added stop.